In the case of Marcello v. Bonds, Officer in Charge, Immigration and Naturalization Service (1954), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that deportation proceedings are civil rather than criminal in nature. The court held that an immigrant facing deportation is not entitled to all constitutional protections afforded to defendants in a criminal trial. This decision came after Salvatore Marcello challenged his deportation order on grounds that it violated his Fifth Amendment rights because he was not granted a jury trial or other procedural safeguards typically provided during criminal prosecutions. However, the court rejected this argument stating that Congress has broad power over immigration matters and can establish its own rules for expulsion without being bound by requirements applicable to judicial trials.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Marcello v. Bonds, Officer In Charge, Immigration and Naturalization Service argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of administrative law. The dissent contended that Marcello should have been allowed to challenge his deportation order through habeas corpus proceedings before being deported. They believed this right was protected by Section 10(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which provides for judicial review of agency actions. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation that immigration cases were exempt from APA requirements due to specific language in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Instead, they asserted that such an exemption would need to be explicitly stated in legislation rather than inferred indirectly as done by the majority ruling.